6 ms·

I have no horse in this race but It's very well known that Apple does indeed pick who bids lowest but: * They put severe requirements on the quality of the p

by xal 15y ago

I have no horse in this race but It's very well known that Apple does indeed pick who bids lowest but: * They put severe requirements on the quality of the produce * They put severe requirements on secrecy * The they put severe requirements on how the workforce needs to be treated All of the above are enforced. Apple has massive teeth. They are king makers of the industry and drop suppliers like a hat for any offences. Yes they end up with whoever bids lowest and isn't yet on their shit list. But labour requirements have been part of these requirements since 1990 and have become ever more demanding since. This is exactly how governments do it. They enter trade and aid agreements with other countries and attach labour requirements. That's the very mechanism which in the long run leads to prosperity.

DanBC 15y ago
> They put severe requirements on the quality of the produce That's not great for workers, who lose pay if they cannot meet these exacting standards. > They put severe requirements on how the workforce needs to be treated The conditions they demand may be better than most workers get in the target country. That doesn't mean those conditions are actually enforced, nor does it mean they are acceptable. The amount of profit Apple makes means it should be fairly easy for them to dramatically improve conditions for overseas workers. That would be a huge sales point for them. Not only do you get pretty design, you know you're funding education / healthcare / whatever for developing world workers.
- Someone 15y ago
  "The amount of profit Apple makes means it should be fairly easy for them to dramatically improve conditions for overseas workers" In a similar vein, the amount of money the average westerner makes means it should be fairly easy for them to save a life in Africa every day. I do not think Apple in particular is to blame for what we as a collective do. "That would be a huge sales point for them" Would it? Can you give one example of a company that behaves that way and gets a hugs sales boost from it? If so, how does that sales boost compare to Apple's profits?
  - ktizo 15y ago
    The entire branding side of fair-trade is based on the idea that there is a sales boost from advertising that you treat your workers fairly. So an obvious example would be Starbucks' investment in fair-trade coffee. [edit] but this only is profitable if people are basing purchasing decisions on it. Before this current furore, there was very little press about these issues, so if from this a 'fair-trade' hardware movement emerges, it would then be profitable for Apple to exploit it, but in the absence of one it isn't.
- vijayr 15y ago
  That would be a huge sales point for them. Are you serious? Since when a shopper gives a damn about how his/her product is made? If that is the case, walmart would not be as big and profitable as they are today. No shopper (or very negligible amount of shoppers) cares about any of these. All they care about is low price, coupons, discounts and deals. How else would a company like Groupon could become so big, so quickly?
  - ktizo 15y ago
    Even Mall-Wart stocks fair-trade products. I don't think they are doing it to be nice.
  - DanBC 15y ago
    > All they care about is low price, coupons, discounts and deals. You make a good point. Many users only care about price, and that's why you can buy an ink-jet printer with starter carts for less than the price of replacement full carts. But with Apple we're not talking about a company that has cheap customers. People are happy to pay a premium for Apple products. Several things make people happy to spend that money - build quality; nice design; user experience; buying experience. "Ethical manufacture" would be one more thing to add to that list. (http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/ http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/) Apple already is a member of the FLA - (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/foremski/think-fair-apple-becomes-the-worlds-first-fair-trade-tech-company-whos-next/2073 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/foremski/think-fair-apple-becomes-...) The drawback is obvious - they have independent reports sometimes criticising the working practices, and their competitors do not.
ktizo 15y ago
"They are king makers of the industry and drop suppliers like a hat for any offences." No they don't; "The FLA investigation, released late last week, resulted in the questioning of 35,000 Foxconn workers across the Chengdu, Longhua and Guanlan factories and found average hours worked per week were 56, compared to the legal Chinese limit of 49 hours, which includes overtime." http://www.crn.com.au/News/295713,apple-auditor-finds-foxconn-violated-worker-rights.aspx http://www.crn.com.au/News/295713,apple-auditor-finds-foxcon... [edit] I do think that Apple has taken a lead by the standards of the electronics industry, but the global standards of the commercial electronics industry are not high and Apple has been embarrassed into a lot of this. If Apple dropped suppliers for any serious violations in the way that you claim, they would not have the giant pile of money they have today.
- xal 15y ago
  Apple is quite adamant on work weeks standards, however this is in direct conflicts with the workers (!!). In fact, workers at Foxcon and others have started preferring to work for other companies then Apple because they can't get the amount of paid overtime that they want. Remember, China is a very different place then the US. Simply taking our own standards and transplanting them onto this area of the world will lead you to misunderstand the signals.
  - Kylekramer 15y ago
    Nah, I think the standards are pretty universal. It isn't surprising they want more hours. It isn't like they love working, they love money (a very universal standard). The reason why it is in direct conflict with the workers is they aren't getting a fair wage. Overtime isn't a sign of happy workers, it is a sign of mismanagement and low wages.
    - sarvinc 15y ago
      This gave me pause; because I'd never thought of things this way. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to fit with my own experience. I've worked jobs that paid overtime. I worked overtime when I could, not because I felt the wage was unfair, but because I wanted the extra money.

by xal 15y ago

DanBC 15y ago

> They put severe requirements on the quality of the produce That's not great for workers, who lose pay if they cannot meet these exacting standards. > They put severe requirements on how the workforce needs to be treated The conditions they demand may be better than most workers get in the target country. That doesn't mean those conditions are actually enforced, nor does it mean they are acceptable. The amount of profit Apple makes means it should be fairly easy for them to dramatically improve conditions for overseas workers. That would be a huge sales point for them. Not only do you get pretty design, you know you're funding education / healthcare / whatever for developing world workers.

Someone 15y ago
"The amount of profit Apple makes means it should be fairly easy for them to dramatically improve conditions for overseas workers" In a similar vein, the amount of money the average westerner makes means it should be fairly easy for them to save a life in Africa every day. I do not think Apple in particular is to blame for what we as a collective do. "That would be a huge sales point for them" Would it? Can you give one example of a company that behaves that way and gets a hugs sales boost from it? If so, how does that sales boost compare to Apple's profits?
- ktizo 15y ago
  The entire branding side of fair-trade is based on the idea that there is a sales boost from advertising that you treat your workers fairly. So an obvious example would be Starbucks' investment in fair-trade coffee. [edit] but this only is profitable if people are basing purchasing decisions on it. Before this current furore, there was very little press about these issues, so if from this a 'fair-trade' hardware movement emerges, it would then be profitable for Apple to exploit it, but in the absence of one it isn't.
vijayr 15y ago
That would be a huge sales point for them. Are you serious? Since when a shopper gives a damn about how his/her product is made? If that is the case, walmart would not be as big and profitable as they are today. No shopper (or very negligible amount of shoppers) cares about any of these. All they care about is low price, coupons, discounts and deals. How else would a company like Groupon could become so big, so quickly?
- ktizo 15y ago
  Even Mall-Wart stocks fair-trade products. I don't think they are doing it to be nice.
- DanBC 15y ago
  > All they care about is low price, coupons, discounts and deals. You make a good point. Many users only care about price, and that's why you can buy an ink-jet printer with starter carts for less than the price of replacement full carts. But with Apple we're not talking about a company that has cheap customers. People are happy to pay a premium for Apple products. Several things make people happy to spend that money - build quality; nice design; user experience; buying experience. "Ethical manufacture" would be one more thing to add to that list. (http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/ http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/) Apple already is a member of the FLA - (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/foremski/think-fair-apple-becomes-the-worlds-first-fair-trade-tech-company-whos-next/2073 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/foremski/think-fair-apple-becomes-...) The drawback is obvious - they have independent reports sometimes criticising the working practices, and their competitors do not.

ktizo 15y ago

"They are king makers of the industry and drop suppliers like a hat for any offences." No they don't; "The FLA investigation, released late last week, resulted in the questioning of 35,000 Foxconn workers across the Chengdu, Longhua and Guanlan factories and found average hours worked per week were 56, compared to the legal Chinese limit of 49 hours, which includes overtime." http://www.crn.com.au/News/295713,apple-auditor-finds-foxconn-violated-worker-rights.aspx http://www.crn.com.au/News/295713,apple-auditor-finds-foxcon... [edit] I do think that Apple has taken a lead by the standards of the electronics industry, but the global standards of the commercial electronics industry are not high and Apple has been embarrassed into a lot of this. If Apple dropped suppliers for any serious violations in the way that you claim, they would not have the giant pile of money they have today.

xal 15y ago
Apple is quite adamant on work weeks standards, however this is in direct conflicts with the workers (!!). In fact, workers at Foxcon and others have started preferring to work for other companies then Apple because they can't get the amount of paid overtime that they want. Remember, China is a very different place then the US. Simply taking our own standards and transplanting them onto this area of the world will lead you to misunderstand the signals.
- Kylekramer 15y ago
  Nah, I think the standards are pretty universal. It isn't surprising they want more hours. It isn't like they love working, they love money (a very universal standard). The reason why it is in direct conflict with the workers is they aren't getting a fair wage. Overtime isn't a sign of happy workers, it is a sign of mismanagement and low wages.
  - sarvinc 15y ago
    This gave me pause; because I'd never thought of things this way. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to fit with my own experience. I've worked jobs that paid overtime. I worked overtime when I could, not because I felt the wage was unfair, but because I wanted the extra money.